We only have to convince people to hate one more car than they already despise.

  • frostbiker
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I said:

    Public transit doesn’t work in sparsely populated suburbs

    You said:

    Your assumption was that collective transit could not work in suburbs.

    As you can plainly see, that is not what I said. Also, it is not an assumption but an observation of the real world.

    I offer that is can work. I fully agree due to socio-political reasons, it would not work.

    Notice how the second sentence is a stronger assertion than what I said, but I’m willing to concede that it may be true. What is plainly obvious is that it does not work in practice, whether it would or would not work hypothetically.

    In the real world, neighborhoods with economically viable frequent public transit require more density than the typical North American suburb. So we can start by fixing density, as the only reason these suburbs are so prevalent are dumb zoning laws that prevent anything other than single family homes to be built.

    • Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I apologize, I must have unpacked my own personal assumptions in what doesn’t work means.

      My point remains that the total cost of transit of the presented option iis the the exact same as personal cars. Therefore it is economically viable.

      It’s not politically viable because people want cars. That’s what stops it in practice. I’m trying to highlight how much people wanting cars fucks all transit equations. 5 car hours is one bus hour.

      I’m in full agreement of unfucking zoning laws, parking minimums, and traffic service standard definitions.

      We’re absolutely in agreement, I just think suburban (even rural) transit can work. We just need to ban the cars and recapture those costs as transit.